Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 03-24-2009, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

My bolding:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Wrong. If Jesus Christ was the Logos, he was pre-existent, beyond mere existence at a particular time and place.

Let me rephrase, to make sure I understand what you are saying:

You seem to be suggesting that Athenagoras, EVEN IF believing that there was a historical Jesus who lived 150 years ago, may have thought that this was not important, since it might as well be part of legendary-mythical time.

My response is: IF this is the case, there might well be a reason for why Athenagoras didn't mention "Jesus" and "Christ", even though thinking that the Logos came as Jesus 150 years earlier.

Your response: I am wrong.

Is that what you are saying? Or you are denying that Athenagoras could have believed in a historical Jesus who died 150 years before? Or you are saying something else?

You have some flair for mangling this.

You are the one who hints (but dare not say) that Athenagoras thought that there was a historical Jesus. I do not think that he believed in a "historical Jesus" that would fit this discussion. His Jesus was the Logos, and the Logos existed beyond time and space. I expect that if you got in a time machine and went back and asked him, he would stare at you as if you didn't understand anything.

Then he might pat you on the head and say, sure, kid, Santa Claus exists.

OK, I made that last part up.

GakuseiDon · 03-24-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

You are the one who hints (but dare not say) that Athenagoras thought that there was a historical Jesus.

I'm not hinting at anything. I'm saying that the evidence is strong that Athenagoras was orthodox in his beliefs. But put that aside for now. I'm interested in any markers that make you think that Athenagoras didn't believe in a historical Jesus.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

I do not think that he believed in a "historical Jesus" that would fit this discussion. His Jesus was the Logos, and the Logos existed beyond time and space. I expect that if you got in a time machine and went back and asked him, he would stare at you as if you didn't understand anything.

Do you think he believed in some kind of being called "Jesus Christ"?

aa5874 · 03-24-2009, 09:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GakuseiDon

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

You are the one who hints (but dare not say) that Athenagoras thought that there was a historical Jesus.

I'm not hinting at anything. I'm saying that the evidence is strong that Athenagoras was orthodox in his beliefs. But put that aside for now. I'm interested in any markers that make you think that Athenagoras didn't believe in a historical Jesus.

It is not true that the evidence is strong that Athenagoras was orthodox.

The evidence reflects the complete opposite.

Athenagoras beliefs were NOT orthodox.

Virtually all the markers to support a belief in Jesus Christ by Athenagoras are missing.

[

spamandham · 03-24-2009, 09:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhavric

These individuals provide the framework for the gospel Jesus. It is from their deeds that the early Christians picked, chose, and invented the stories that would eventually become the godman of the bible.

I think it goes much further than that. There are curious parallels between the Gospel stories and stories in Josephus as well. Too much to be coincidence, IMHO.

Wiploc · 03-24-2009, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhavric

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiploc

Welcome to FRDB!

I like your theory. It's a new one for me. I'm
curious, though, as to why you believe it.

crc

What's more likely? That an incarnate godman who history completely missed stormed through Judea or a cult that was looking to take advantage of desperate people became the 1st century's answer to Scientology?

That's not an answer. You can't establish the truth of your theory by pointing out that one of the many alternatives is nuts.

crc

gentleexit · 03-24-2009, 10:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zhavric

These individuals provide the framework for the gospel Jesus. It is from their deeds that the early Christians picked, chose, and invented the stories that would eventually become the godman of the bible.

I think it goes much further than that. There are curious parallels between the Gospel stories and stories in Josephus as well. Too much to be coincidence, IMHO.

But isn't this too neat, this Jesus-by-numbers? Josephus was writing of a time of crisis in Judaism that gave rise to many movements and holy men. Some he covered. No doubt some he didn't. He wasn't the only source of stories to those writing at the time - he's just the one we know of. Stories of men warning, men predicting, trying to understand turmoil in their tribe.

To believe in a straight line from Josephus to the gospel stories means accepting "Mark" as a very creative man and more, as a very deceptive one. Now I'm not saying he couldn't be "inspired" to exaggerate - what's a bard after all? - but that differs from conscious whole scale fabrication.

Josephus reflected his era. So did Mark. A straight line from J to M? Don't pass "tradition building on tradition", "story growing with the telling". Couldn't both just reflect their time and its concerns, independently?

razlyubleno · 03-24-2009, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wiploc

That's not an answer. You can't establish the truth of your theory by pointing out that one of the many alternatives is nuts.

But he can establish the relative probability of the truth of his theory, and this doesn't violate any rules of logic. It's okay to having leanings toward the better probabilities.

razly

aa5874 · 03-24-2009, 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gentleexit

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Athenagoras tailored his message to his audience

Right, Marcus was a Stoic. Hence the emphasis on "Logos". Saying "this crucified guy" said ya and da would not be sell. All apology or polemic sells and the good focuses. Athenagoras reduces and uses words familiar to his audience just like the OP did above. Neither piece mandates that someone doesn't know or believe more than he's saying.

This does not make sense.

Justin Martyr said Jesus was crucified, buried, raised from the dead to the same pagan audience as Athenagoras.

Justin was selling Jesus Christ.

It should be obvious that Athenagoras was selling the Logos.

spamandham · 03-24-2009, 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gentleexit

Quote:

Originally Posted by spamandham

I think it goes much further than that. There are curious parallels between the Gospel stories and stories in Josephus as well. Too much to be coincidence, IMHO.

But isn't this too neat, this Jesus-by-numbers?

I intentionally refrained from stating the reason for the parallels. One could have influenced the other, or they both could have been influenced by common themes.

razlyubleno · 03-24-2009, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aa5874

This does not make sense.

Justin Martyr said Jesus was crucified, buried, raised from the dead to the same pagan audience as Athenagoras.

<snip>
Actually, I have no idea what you're talking about. I mistook your final point for sarcasm, but now I have nothing to say, since I'm confused.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.